The US right, fortunately, mostly still inhabits a world of rhetorical violence. You see, despite the rhetoric and the history, precious few wingnuts are actually willing to move beyond talk and engage in real political violence.
Theirs is an unreality where, despite their relative wealth and affluence, they live under a tyrannical government run by [circle one or more: gay/feminist/communist/Islamist/____]. They get high on the metheteric from Beck and Limbaugh, wank to the pornstar from Alaska, collect AR-15s and crates of ammunition, talk about liberty trees over barbecued steak and urine-beer. Their chat rooms are full of implicit and explicit anti-left and anti-government threats. Yet by and large, these people are palpably unwilling to act on their rhetoric.
So they get the odd fringe terrorist like a McVeigh or Loughner but, thankfully, the bulk of the right haven't managed to organise themselves enough to pull a Fort Sumter. Instead, the real fanatics in their ranks that end up detonating truck bombs or squeezing triggers are immediately parsed and disowned, thrown to the wolves, or associated with the left in some way. Their cowardice is a marvel but it is understandable. Crossing the line into an organised campaign of political violence destroys their personal security in real terms, not their imagined hardship under the policies of a Clinton or Obama.
They are much more comfortable then to elect a Bush or a Palin: No immediate personal risk but all the rhetorical crack they can consume. For now.
The danger, I think, rests in the near future should the US continue its socio-economic decline. Prolonged recession, higher oil prices, changes in social structures all deepen fracture lines in society and more organised and coherent campaigns might emerge as people have less and less to lose. But then by that point, it's probably game over of the UNITED States of America. However, in the meanwhile they are unable to walk their talk and that is a very good thing.